Send us a link
This month marks the 350th anniversary of arguably the first and longest-running scientific journal, Philosophical Transactions: Giving Some Accompt of the Present Undertakings, Studies, and Labours of the Ingenious in Many Considerable Parts of the World.
A controversial statistical test has finally met its end, at least in one journal.
It has taken a while, but the Swiss Academies of Arts and Sciences (SAAS) have come out with a valuable booklet on authorships of scientific manuscripts. This recommendations, published now also as a special article in the Swiss Medical Weekly, aspire to serve as a practical guide for principal investigators confronted with the task of assigning authorships to the individuals contributing to scientific manuscripts.
Researchers are buzzing about a publication that accepts only 'brief ideas'.
Germany's Holtzbrinck, which owns Nature publisher Macmillan Science and Education, will combine the majority of its activities with BC Partners' Springer unit.
Four conditions that need to be satisfied for a document to be considered a citable piece of scientific work.
A large research university will pay between $3-3.5 million a year in academic subscription fees...
Scientific publishers must shake off three centuries of publishing on paper and embrace 21st century technology to make scientific communication more intelligible, reproducible, engaging and rapidly available.
Half of the papers appearing at the NIPS conference would be rejected if the review process were rerun.
The troubled present and promising future of scholarly communication.
While The Conversation is built around a journalistic model, there is a big growth in online, open-access journals each with different approaches to peer review.
Technology has helped so many industries evolve over the past few decades, but scientific publishing, surprisingly, has hardly changed since the first journal article in 1665.
Freedom of Information requests reveal substantial hikes in university outlay despite open access push.
Raw data from Nature Publishing Group and Palgrave Macmillan's annual Author Insights survey.
Intransparenz bei den Bibliotheksausgaben von Schweizer Hochschulen
I have never liked how scientific journals charge us to read the research that we produce. But that is another debate for another day. What I really hate is how they abuse this power to stifle debate in the name of their business interests.
The culture of scientific publishing is complex. Some problems need technical solutions, but others require a cultural change within academia.
Google is allegedly working on a free, open access platform for the research, collaboration and publishing of peer-reviewed scientific journals. At least, that is apparently what one individual wants us to believe.
Something is rotten in the state of academic publishing. But even those of us in the thick of it find it hard to pinpoint exactly what is wrong.
The increasing pace of human discovery is a curse – we need to rethink what it means to publish the results of research.
A new study finds that very few scientists (fewer than 1%) manage to publish a paper every year. But these scientists dominate the research journals, having their names on 41% of all papers.
New policy follows efforts by other journals to bolster standards of data analysis.
Why has academic knowledge become more expensive for consumers while music has become less expensive, and what can we do about it? Doing nothing to prevent the trading of electronic copies of our academic work could act to circumvent the perils of engagement with the academic publishing industry.
Members of the US National Academy of Sciences have long enjoyed a privileged path to publication in PNAS. Meet the scientists who use it most heavily.
A new study shows universities pay more or less for academic journal bundles than would be expected based simply on size or number of Ph.D.s granted.
The lower bound number of scholarly documents, published in English, available on the web is roughly 114 million.
The answer is - in our experience, at least - about 9 months. That's right, it takes about the same amount of time to have a baby as it does to publish a scientific paper.
Liz Allen, Amy Brand, Jo Scott, Micah Altman and Marjorie Hlava are trialling digital taxonomies to help researchers to identify their contributions to collaborative projects. Research today is rarely a one-person job.
Comment of Elsevier's Director of Access and Policy on a blog
Publishing everything is more effective than only reporting significant outcomes.
